Originally Posted by sam1966
The graphs don’t show the reasons the gains stopped. Why does the stoppage of growth have to be because of some theoretical limit? It could be for one of the three reasons I mentioned in my previous post.
You’re right, Sam1966, they don’t show the reasons the gains stopped, and the reasons for stopping could be for one of the three non-physiological causes you proposed. But you haven’t answered my question: with the tens of thousands of members here, don’t you think there’d be at least some who wanted four, five or six inches? Where are they with their results?
Out of the tens of thousands of members here, how many four inch gainers have there been?
You can say, well, they gave up because it got harder and harder to gain, not impossible to gain. Fine. Let’s accept that for the sake of argument. So WHY does it get harder and harder to gain? What (and it could be more than one thing) was changing during the time that increases went from easy newbie gains to increasingly difficult gains?
And there are limits to how much you can increase your PE effort. If your penis becomes increasingly refractory to increase in size, you cannot PE more than twenty-four hours a day or seven days a week. There are limits to the strength of human flesh, should you want to stretch harder and harder or pump more and more intensively. And finally, as a thought experiment, what happens when you grow your dick so large that your heart can no longer pump blood through your body? A ridiculous extreme, to be sure, but you are arguing in favor of no physiological limits, which would seem to put that ridiculous scenario in play.
It reminds me of a joke sometimes attributed to Sir Winston Churchill:
A man walks up to a beautiful young woman and says, “Will you sleep with me for a million dollars?”
She says, “Sure.”
So he says, “Will you sleep with me for a dollar then?”
She slaps him in the face and says, “What kind of woman do you think I am?”
He replies, “We have already established that, we are just arguing over price.”
I’ll remind you of your initial statement:
Originally Posted by sam1966
I know I’m new at this, but I don’t see why there would be any physiological reason for there to be an upper limit on gains.
Do you still want to contend that there are no physiological limits on growth, or would it be more productive to consider what those limits may be and how we might best surmount them?